Short-term accommodation: new funding model

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #57485
    agoentis
    Participant

    The new consultation document  appears to contradict itself on the new funding model for short term accommodation.  Paragraph 57 states:

    Following discussions with the supported housing sector, we have designed a new grant funding model for short-term supported housing. This means provision will be commissioned at a local level, funded locally through a ring-fenced grant, and underpinned by a new local planning and oversight regime. All the funding for housing costs (including rent and eligible service charges) that were previously met from Housing Benefit, will instead be allocated to local authorities to fund services that meet the needs of their local areas. This will give local authorities an enhanced role in planning, funding and commissioning short-term supported housing in their area. It will entirely remove short-term supported housing from the welfare system (Housing Benefit and the housing element in Universal Credit). However, an individual’s entitlement for help with their housing costs (through Housing Benefit or the housing cost element of Universal Credit) will be unchanged.

    Also, at paragraph 86 it states:

    The details of the funding model are explained in detail in Section 1, Chapter 3. The key elements of the new model are:

    100% of this provision will be commissioned at a local level and funded locally through a ring-fenced grant. This removes funding from the welfare system entirely (an individual’s entitlement for help with their housing costs (through Housing Benefit or the housing cost element of Universal Credit) will be unchanged)

    While the prime minister has made clear such claims will no longer be subject to an LHA cap, the document is ambigious on what funding will remain within the welfare system. Both these paragraphs appear to contradict themselves by stating that:

    • 100% of housing costs will be met by the grant removing short-term supported accommodation from HB/UC entirely
    • Individuals' entitlement to HB or UC for assistance with housing costs will remain unchanged.

    Does this mean that government are now suggesting that HB claims are capped at the rent officer rent rather than LHA, as it is unclear how supported accommodation could be removed and remain simultaneously! 

    Any thoughts? Clearly restricting HB to the ROD would not be the great breakthrough that many of us were hoping for in this document.

     

    #162937
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I must admit I'm completely confused!

    I thought I understood it – '100% of housing costs will be met by the grant removing short-term supported accommodation from HB/UC entirely' but then that seems to be flatly contradicted by 'Individuals' entitlement to HB or UC for assistance with housing costs will remain unchanged.'.

    Are their housing costs being 'reomved entirely from UC/HB' or not???

    #162939
    Rattj002
    Participant

    It's clarified elsewhere stating that 'short term supported accommodation' properties will no longer charge rent. I read the bit about entitlement being unchanged as relating to instances where there is currently HB on two homes, i.e. fleeing to a refuge and maintaining another property.

    It is entirely unclear however what 'remaining in the welfare system' (91% of the current caseload) means – references are made to HB/UC as if they were one and the same. This does however represent a rowing back from the position the 'Task and Finish' Groups were commenting on, as their options for analysis was a 'welfare based solution' within UC or a non-UC solution that was 'non-welfare based.' Perhaps no firm decision as to delivery has yet been arrived at?

    #162940
    markg
    Participant

    this bit had me confused too:

     '100% of housing costs will be met by the grant removing short-term supported accommodation from HB/UC entirely' but then that seems to be flatly contradicted by 'Individuals' entitlement to HB or UC for assistance with housing costs will remain unchanged.'.

    But does it actually mean: they remain entitled to HB or UC HCE, it is just that this is actually paid from the ring fenced pot rather than through the welfare system.

    #162941
    David
    Participant

    Not clear to me either. I have requested clarification using the link at the start of the document.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.